Package: librust-debcargo-dev
Version: 2.2.10-1
Severity: serious
Tags: sid
User: ubuntu-de...@lists.ubuntu.com
Usertags: origin-ubuntu eoan
Hi Ximin,
The librust-debcargo-dev package is uninstallable in unstable because it
depends on older ABIs of librust-cargo-dev and librust-git2-dev:
$ sudo
Package: grub-efi-amd64
Version: 2.04-1
Severity: grave
Hi,
since the last update the grub no longer works. It fails very early with
symbol `grub_file_filters` not found
and enters the rescue shell. After downgrading it back to 2.02+dfsg1-20
everything works again as expected.
Cheers
--
On Thu, 11 Jul 2019, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> I have NMUed to DELAYED/1, a diff was sent to the bug report, but
Thnaks!
Norbert
--
PREINING Norbert http://www.preining.info
Accelia Inc. + IFMGA ProGuide + TU Wien + JAIST + TeX Live + Debian Dev
GPG: 0x860CDC13
Package: gnome
Version: 1:3.30+1
Severity: serious
Tags: security
Justification: 5
Dear Maintainer,
It became apparent that despite explicit settings of gnome desktop environment
"Settings -> All Settings -> Privacy -> Location Services" set to "OFF",
package 'geoclue-2.0' along with packages
mh, no. I think some logic needs tweaking, as file is definitely present
(it's an hard dependency of diffoscope), and that test should just be
skipped.
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 11:42 PM Chris Lamb wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> > At the very least, it seems this should be a versioned test
Your message dated Thu, 11 Jul 2019 23:25:00 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#930469: fixed in chromium 76.0.3809.62-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #930469,
regarding chromium: Insta-segfault on start
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt
Steve Langasek wrote:
> At the very least, it seems this should be a versioned test dep on file (>=
> 5.37), but perhaps it should also be a versioned runtime dependency. I
> haven't looked to see what the impact is of the wrong version of 'file' when
> DIFFOSCOPE_TESTS_FAIL_ON_MISSING_TOOLS is
Hi Niko,
> > I guess in theory but if I recall the details correctly, I don't
> > /think/ this was going to be a trivial patch to Archive::Zip and my
> > Perl-fu is/was a bit weak. Would pkg-perl apply and upload a patch
> > anyway?
[…]
> Obviously features would be best developed upstream.
Source: pymvpa2
Version: 2.6.5-1
Severity: serious
This package FTBFS in sid (plain dpkg-buildpackage) with these test
failures (which are different from the ones in #906399, but the same as
the ones in reproducible-builds).
This bug was found during statsmodels 0.9 transition testing, but
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> close 931432 2.2.0-1
Bug #931432 {Done: Salvatore Bonaccorso } [src:sssd] sssd:
CVE-2018-16838
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #931432 to the same values
previously set
Bug #931432 {Done: Salvatore Bonaccorso } [src:sssd] sssd:
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> close 931432 2.2.0-1
Bug #931432 [src:sssd] sssd: CVE-2018-16838
Marked as fixed in versions sssd/2.2.0-1.
Bug #931432 [src:sssd] sssd: CVE-2018-16838
Marked Bug as done
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need
close 931432 2.2.0-1
thanks
The issue was fixed upstream, but this bug not closed with the 2.2.0-1 upload
to unstable.
Package: diffoscope
Version: 117
Severity: serious
Justification: autopkgtest failures and runtime failures
User: ubuntu-de...@lists.ubuntu.com
Usertags: origin-ubuntu eoan
Dear maintainers,
diffoscope 117 is not migratable to testing because its autopkgtests are
failing, due to runtime errors
Source: slurm-llnl
Version: 18.08.6.2-1
Severity: grave
Tags: security upstream
Control: found -1 18.08.5.2-1
Control: found -1 16.05.9-1+deb9u4
Control: found -1 16.05.9-1
Hi,
The following vulnerability was published for slurm-llnl. I'm filling
it with an RC severity to be on safe side, but
Processing control commands:
> found -1 18.08.5.2-1
Bug #931880 [src:slurm-llnl] slurm-llnl: CVE-2019-12838
Marked as found in versions slurm-llnl/18.08.5.2-1.
> found -1 16.05.9-1+deb9u4
Bug #931880 [src:slurm-llnl] slurm-llnl: CVE-2019-12838
Marked as found in versions
Re: David Kalnischkies 2019-07-10 <20190710100502.yoe2umfxyiuglaw2@crossbow>
> http://deb.devuan.org/devuan/dists/stable/Release
> http://deb.devuan.org/merged/dists/stable/Release
>
> The two release pockets differ by Suite only.
Hi,
this bug is not about fixing problems that devuan and the
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> #
> # bts-link upstream status pull for source package src:parso
> # see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg1.html
> # https://bts-link-team.pages.debian.net/bts-link/
> #
> user debian-bts-l...@lists.debian.org
On Fri, 23 Nov 2018 21:42:06 +0100 "W. Martin Borgert"
wrote:
> I use linphone on stretch as my one and only telephone.
> So far, I did not encounter this problem.
> I suggest to downgrade this issue to "important",
> because it seems to affect only few users.
>
For me it is exactly the same
Package: gnome-shell-extension-dashtodock
Severity: grave
gnome-shell-extension-dashtodock : Depends: gnome-shell (>= 3.32) but 3.30.2-9
is to be installed
-- System Information:
Debian Release: bullseye/sid
APT prefers unstable-debug
APT policy: (500, 'unstable-debug'), (500,
Package: gnome-shell-extension-appindicator
Severity: grave
gnome-shell-extension-appindicator : Depends: gnome-shell (>= 3.31) but
3.30.2-9 is to be installed
-- System Information:
Debian Release: bullseye/sid
APT prefers unstable-debug
APT policy: (500, 'unstable-debug'), (500,
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 normal
Bug #931869 [wine64-tools] wine64-tools and wine32-tools:i386 are mutually
asking for removal of each other
Severity set to 'normal' from 'serious'
> tag -1 - ftbfs
Bug #931869 [wine64-tools] wine64-tools and wine32-tools:i386 are mutually
Control: severity -1 normal
Control: tag -1 - ftbfs
FTBFS means that the package you file the bug on doesn’t build; it’s not
appropriate if another piece of software is harder to build.
On 11 July 2019 19:37:28 CEST, Arnaldo Pirrone wrote:
>Package: wine64-tools
>Version: 4.0-2
>Severity:
Package: wine64-tools
Version: 4.0-2
Severity: serious
Tags: ftbfs
Justification: fails to build from source (but built successfully in the past)
wine64-tools and wine32-tools:i386 mutually ask for removal of each other.
This is making difficult to build Carla from source. (You have to install
On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 04:08:18PM -0300, Chris Lamb wrote:
> > the recently added libmonkey-patch-perl dependency in
> > libfile-stripnondeterminism-perl has unfortunately resulted in a build
> > dependency cycle
> […]
> > I see this new dependency was introduced for normalizing zip archives
>
El Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 05:28:30PM +0200, Agustin Martin deia:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 04:17:30PM +0200, Agustin Martin wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 04:02:13PM +0200, Xavi Drudis Ferran wrote:
> > >
> > > I attach the script. It prints some (c) info on the *_rc.py files.
> > > You might
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 04:17:30PM +0200, Agustin Martin wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 04:02:13PM +0200, Xavi Drudis Ferran wrote:
> >
> > I attach the script. It prints some (c) info on the *_rc.py files.
> > You might need to change the uniconvertor directory in the script.
> > And you may
Package: sssd-common
Version: 2.2.0-2
Severity: grave
During installation of sssd-common the following error occurs:
Setting up sssd-common (2.2.0-2) ...
chown: cannot access '/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/sssd/p11_child': No such
file or directory
dpkg: error processing package sssd-common
Hey Noah,
* Noah Meyerhans [190711 14:17]:
> If you disagree that ipsec-tools should be removed from future Debian
> releases, please say so now.
As we haven't really heard from anyone, should I go ahead and ask
for final removal via ftpmaster?
Cheers,
Chris
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 04:02:13PM +0200, Xavi Drudis Ferran wrote:
>
> I attach the script. It prints some (c) info on the *_rc.py files.
> You might need to change the uniconvertor directory in the script.
> And you may not really find it too enlightening...
Thanks a lot,
I was already
I attach the script. It prints some (c) info on the *_rc.py files.
You might need to change the uniconvertor directory in the script.
And you may not really find it too enlightening...
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
#
# Copyright (C) 2011-2018 by Igor E. Novikov
#
# This program is free software:
El Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 03:38:03PM +0200, Agustin Martin deia:
> On Fri, Jul 05, 2019 at 10:50:08PM +0200, Xavi Drudis Ferran wrote:
> > Well, for what is worth here're the files for a package that builds
> > and install on buster for uniconvertor-2.0rc4. But I haven't
> > tested. Only did a sg to
On Fri, Jul 05, 2019 at 10:50:08PM +0200, Xavi Drudis Ferran wrote:
> Well, for what is worth here're the files for a package that builds
> and install on buster for uniconvertor-2.0rc4. But I haven't
> tested. Only did a sg to pdf conversion once. I may have done
> lots of things wrong, of
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> severity 931777 grave
Bug #931777 [cinnamon] cinnamon-settings does not start due incompatibility
with python3-pil >= 6.0
Severity set to 'grave' from 'important'
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
Package: pysolfc
Version: 2.0-4
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 10.0
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (150, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386
Kernel: Linux 4.19.0-5-amd64 (SMP
Package: python3-os-collect-config
Version: 10.3.0-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'testing'.
It installed fine in 'testing', then the upgrade to 'sid' fails
because it tries to
>
> Bug reports should be sent to Launchpad:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/sbcl/
>
thanks, I don't think I'll try to contact upstream, I don't find even an
email...
Looks like the patch I provided was not working, armv7 should be probably
changed to armv7-a
(while armv4 didn't work because
Your message dated Thu, 11 Jul 2019 10:20:42 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#930672: fixed in geophar 18.08.2+dfsg2-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #930672,
regarding geophar: Please fix the bug with the obsoleted class
FigureCanvasQTAggBase
to be marked as done.
This means that
Your message dated Thu, 11 Jul 2019 10:07:13 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#907348: fixed in dateutils 0.4.5-1.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #907348,
regarding dateutils FTBFS on 32bit: test failures
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt
Your message dated Thu, 11 Jul 2019 09:50:23 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#931839: fixed in udisks2 2.8.3-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #931839,
regarding udisks2: ships /lib/systemd/system/zram-setup@.service
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has
Your message dated Thu, 11 Jul 2019 11:30:03 +0200
with message-id <62f8b845-08a0-81ca-00b7-4f8bfe50a...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#919348: is it still unfit for Bullseye?
has caused the Debian Bug report #919348,
regarding xfce4-screensaver: Accidental upload to unstable while fixing
> So we're filing an RC bug to prevent it from migrating to testing,
> this can be closed once buster is frozen.
So... is there any reason to not let xfce4-screensaver go to Bullseye?
Any day that a human being suffers from light-locker is a bad day.
If you're afraid about yet-unknown bugs, more
Package: udisks2
Version: 2.8.3-2
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install
because it tries to overwrite other packages files.
>From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
Unpacking
Lib needs to replaced with libexec, trivial fix.
Should I prepare a nmu?
Norbert
On July 11, 2019 4:42:15 PM GMT+09:00, Julian Andres Klode
wrote:
>Control: severity -1 serious
>
>On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 08:25:31AM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
>> Package: neomutt
>> Version:
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 05:08:12PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> Lib needs to replaced with libexec, trivial fix.
>
> Should I prepare a nmu?
I have NMUed to DELAYED/1, a diff was sent to the bug report, but
probably you did not get CCed.
--
debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org -
Processing control commands:
> tags 931746 + patch
Bug #931746 [neomutt] neomutt: /etc/neomuttrc tries to source
/usr/lib/neomutt/source-neomuttrc.d which is not existing
Added tag(s) patch.
> tags 931746 + pending
Bug #931746 [neomutt] neomutt: /etc/neomuttrc tries to source
Control: tags 931746 + patch
Control: tags 931746 + pending
Dear maintainer,
I've prepared an NMU for neomutt (versioned as 20180716+dfsg.1-1.2) and
uploaded it to DELAYED/1. Please feel free to tell me if I
should delay it longer.
Regards.
--
debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org -
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 serious
Bug #931746 [neomutt] neomutt: /etc/neomuttrc tries to source
/usr/lib/neomutt/source-neomuttrc.d which is not existing
Severity set to 'serious' from 'normal'
--
931746: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=931746
Debian Bug
47 matches
Mail list logo
